DING DING DING. we have a winner here.
I said this from the very beginning, if we want ridership we need to start off with making it free. When it was free, OKC Streetcar had excellent ridership. When it began to charge, ridership sunk. When they fixed the stops (stopping unnecessarily at every station), ridership has improved but still not to the level of free.
THEREFORE - why are people on here keep arguing that the streetcar is a failure due to ridership? OKC is not a transit first city, and hasn't had good transit options for what 50 years. WHY would anybody expect ridership of any transit mode unless it were free OR truly went where mass population needed it?
It is for this reason why I argue, still, that the primary purpose of the streetcar initially has been for economic development. And it has fulfulled this role. This is no different than other cities that have implemented (and charged) for streetcar that doesn't really go anywhere. SLUT (Seattle South Lake Union Trolley) was also a development mode - NEVER really intended for transit but to HELP develop South Lake Union into what it is. Now, they are talking about removing the trolley since the area is built up. Contrast that with the Seattle First Hill Streetcar, which is a REAL transit mode going from Pioneer Square to Chinatown to Little Saigon to Capital Hill; this was always intended to be a transit option first - look at the connections.
IF the OKC Streetcar were intended to be transit (first anyway), they would have connected it to the Oklahoma Health Center, Capital Hill, and Uptown. Since they didn't, then it was a development tool that serves as the last mile option for downtown attractions (ala Portland Streetcar initial construction) that can be extended later. What OKC missed was that Portland Streetcar was FREE until it was extended.
Oklahoma City, the RENAISSANCE CITY!
For sure, I agree with you 100%! The arena and Santa Fe transit hub being right next to one another is a massive win for everyone! If I'm remembering what I read correctly, I think one of the main entrances to the arena will be directly across from Santa Fe Station. That's super exciting! I can't wait to be able to ride the train into downtown to go to a game or concert without needing to drive!
Do you know if all votes will be tallied together or is each municipality a distinct election? In the latter case, would OKC and Norman move forward with a system if their votes passed but Edmond’s failed?
If all votes are tallied together, I could see the OKC and Norman vote more than offsetting the no’s in Edmond.
I would personally be shocked if Edmond said no. Everyone I have talked about it with is excited at the possibility.
For whatever it’s worth, I have two relatives that I’ve spoken to about this system that said they would utilize the park-and-ride system if it was built at Boulevard and coffee Creek. I think you’re underestimating the amount of people in Edmond, who would utilize such a system. But then again, I’m not doubting you that Edmondites would vote down a tax for a commuter rail connection. Edmond is not exactly a progressive city.
Attended UCO through all of its name changes from CSC, CSU to UCO. Now the City of Edmond is a different animal when it comes to rail. IMO a lot will depend on how rail is presented to the city and its benefits to Edmond's future.
I don't live in Edmond; however I have to travel to there for goods and services. The growth over the last 35 years has been impressive. UCO is not the university I attended decades ago. It's much more beautifully landscaped with an artificial lake; makes me proud to have attended one of Oklahoma's fine universities.
BTW any updates on the arena.
I can believe that exist in Edmond for sure. Like I said it’s anecdotal so it doesn’t mean much. But my family is middle class. Some are upper middle class. I’ve talked to a couple of them who said they would in fact use it. Whether they really would, I don’t know. A lot of people say things that they would do but then don’t do it. But like I said, I absolutely would not be surprised if Edmond turned down this transit tax.
If you can park a block or two away from a train that gets you across the street from thunder games and a block away from bricktown, and it is almost as fast as driving, then I think there will be plenty of people using it. Additionally, getting an uber/lyft/taxi from your house in suburban edmond/norman to the train station is going to be much cheaper than from downtown OKC if you plan on doing any amount of drinking.
I know it is billed as commuter rail, but the arena placement (and bricktown having the ballpark and soccer stadium) is going to make the train a very compelling option for a lot of people. And for the people who still want to drive--another option for people getting to the arena just means better parking availability for you.
One big negative stereotype I’ve noticed about any kind of rail system being proposed and I even see this out here in LA is that if a reel extension be at commuter or light rail or a subway is proposed into a suburban area people get up in arms about it because they claim it’s gonna bring homelessness and crime. I suspect that trope will be repeated when an actual proposal and tax is put forth for voters, especially in a community like Edmond. There was some wealthy suburb in Atlanta that had a proposal to extend MARTA and I believe it was turned down because people said just that.
But in reality, I agree with you like you said it seems like a win-win for everybody. I have a relative who is a software engineer or something like that at Devon who lives in North Edmond, and says they would gladly take rail from Edmond to downtown OKC if it was available. They go on frequent trips to Europe and talk about how great the real system is and how much they use it. I do think if such a system were built as it’s proposed with a stop in downtown Edmond and one park and ride station near Boulevard and coffee Creek that it would be popular.
I hope they take a lesson from the Dallas RTD and incent developers to build dense multi-use developments at the rail stops in return for their inclusion (the building of) of the actual rail station and rail parking. Denver failed to do this and are stuck with parking across highways or 2 blocks from the stop.
Maybe I need to give it another chance, but I flew in the Denver one time and tried to use their transit system and I mean it was the worst transit system I have ever seen. I spent what felt like two hours on the light rail line from the airport to downtown. The frequencies were horrible. Bus driver passed our stop twice and it was cold and snowing out. I ended up saying f@ck it and renting a car.
I might’ve been exaggerating the time it took because I didn’t time it exactly it just felt like a long time for some reason. It was a useful system getting from the airport to downtown. It just felt like it took forever. I guess I just didn’t realize how far the airport was from downtown. That said it was easy to use. The real problem was for me getting to other parts of Denver, especially to Boulder. Like I said, I need to give it another go and check it out.
Did Dallas do this? Pretty much the entire A-Train and Green line into Dallas are park and rides with no development. However, the Downtown Denton stop (A-Train) and Trinity Mills (Green Line) are finally getting some apartments. But, god, I hope no one is looking to Dallas' rail as a good example. As a regular rider, I have so many complaints about the design. OKC could do better.
There are currently 4 users browsing this thread. (1 members and 3 guests)
Bookmarks